Identifying family and environmental factors which may contribute to neglect Recognition and Response P3 1 Learning Outcomes To identify family and environmental factors which may contribute to neglect. 2 Structural inequality  A social structure which has inequality already “built in”.  Hierarchical differences between people that affects access to resources (unequal opportunities).  Structural inequality lies in the way in which the dimensions interact one with another. For example For example Health Education Housing Income Economic status Race / Ethnicity Gender Sexuality Disability 3 Position of the UK of 21 OECD Countries RANKED 20 18 17 12 21 ininterms of its terms ofability to… children's own support children's address meet promote the the the health material and protect children from perceptions of relationships with wellbeing safety educational needs ofbehaviour wellbeing its of their its risk-taking general wellbeing family and peers children of its children United Nations Children’s Fund 2007 www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf 4 If you look at rich countries and compare:         life expectancy mental health levels of violence teenage birth rates drug abuse obesity rates levels of trust the educational performance of school children the strength of community life you findmore that countries which tend to do The unequal a society The key is the measures amount oftend to well on one of these What accounts for thesociety. difference? is, the more ill health inequality in each do well on all of them, and theand ones social problems it on has. which do badly, do badly all of them. 5 Health and social problems are worse in more unequal countries Index of: (including drug & Index of health and social problems Life expectancy alcohol addiction) Better Math & Literacy Infant mortality Homicides Imprisonment Teenage births Trust Obesity Mental illness Social mobility USA Worse Portugal UK Greece New Zealand Ireland Austria France Australia Germany Denmark Canada Italy Spain Belgium Switzerland Finland Norway Netherlands Sweden Japan Low Source: Wilkinson & Pickett, The Spirit Level (2008) Income Inequality High 6 Key Facts: Child poverty and health  Infant deaths are 50 per cent more common among families from manual backgrounds than those from nonmanual class backgrounds.  Babies from manual class backgrounds are more likely to have a low birth-weight than those from non-manual class backgrounds – low birth-weight babies are at greater risk of mortality and morbidity during childhood.  Studies have found a close association between mental disorder in children and economic disadvantage. Source: Centre for Economic and Social Inclusion/Child Poverty Action www.childpovertytoolkit.org.uk/uimages/File/CP_Health.pdf 7 Key Facts: Child poverty and health  Children from the lowest income groups are more likely to be obese than those from top income groups.  Children from manual class backgrounds are significantly more likely to die in accidents than other children.  Research has found a very close association between teenage pregnancy and social and economic disadvantage. Source: Centre for Economic and Social Inclusion/Child Poverty Action Group http://www.childpovertytoolkit.org.uk/uimages/File/CP_Health.pdf 8 Key Facts: Child poverty and education  By age three, being in poverty makes a difference equivalent to nine months’ development in school readiness.  During their years at school, children in receipt of free school meals (a key indicator of poverty) do progressively worse on average at school than their peers.  Children who do badly at primary school are less likely to improve at secondary school if they are poor. Source: Centre for Economic and Social Inclusion/Child Poverty Action Group www.childpovertytoolkit.org.uk/uimages/File/CP_Health.pdf 9 Key Facts: Child poverty and education  Children from poor families are more likely to have poor qualifications.  Young people with parents in manual occupations are far less likely than others to go to university and only 1 in 6 of students at top universities come from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Source: Centre for Economic and Social Inclusion/Child Poverty Action Group www.childpovertytoolkit.org.uk/uimages/File/CP_Health.pdf 10 Key Facts: Child poverty and housing  Households in poverty are more likely than average to live in non-decent homes than other households and to live in poor quality environments.  Householders living in the most deprived areas are more likely to live in overcrowded homes than those in other areas - over two-thirds of over-crowded households in England are in the 10 per cent most deprived areas. Source: Centre for Economic and Social Inclusion/Child Poverty Action Group www.childpovertytoolkit.org.uk/uimages/File/CP_Health.pdf 11 Key Facts: Child poverty and housing  Those living in the most deprived areas are more likely to be dissatisfied with the area they live in than those in other areas.  Those living in the most deprived areas are also more likely to say that there is a problem in their area such as drugs.  By the end of 2010, approximately 5% of households were living in temporary accommodation. Source: House of Commons Note on Homeless Households in Temporary Accommodation, 2011 12 Children at greatest risk of poverty  Children of lone parents.  Children in large families.  Disabled children.  Children with disabled parents.  Children growing up in social housing.  Black and minority ethnic children.  Asylum seekers.  Traveller and gypsy families.  Children leaving care. 13 “A review of evidence from children reveals that the experience of poverty in childhood can be highly damaging and the effects of poverty are both pervasive and disruptive. Poverty permeates every facet of children’s lives, from economic and material disadvantages, through social and relational constraints and exclusions, to the personal and more hidden aspects of poverty associated with shame, sadness and the fear of difference and stigma.” Ridge 2009:Research Summary 14 “A family’s experience of poverty are not isolated from other factors in their lives and complex social, cultural and economic processes and divisions create particular challenges.........Parenting under economic pressure can be particularly difficult and although parents strive to protect their children and put them first, this is often at great personal cost particularly for women. Evidence from parents reveals key tensions within low-income families as parents try to balance conflicting demands within the restrictions of a low income.” (Ridge 2009: Research Summary) 15  Children are not always passive recipients but often actively intervene in their situations.  Poverty and disadvantage per se do not determine neglect.  The vast majority of impoverished families do not neglect their children. 16 Implications for practice  Assessments tend to be ‘poverty blind’.  The relationship between poverty and disadvantage is complex.  An approach that considers both ‘public issues’ and “private troubles” is likely to be helpful.  Need to locate children and families in their wider social and ‘community’ context. 17 Ecological approaches Are based on the premise that the development and behaviour of individuals can be fully understood only in the context of the environments in which the live. A systems framework is used to examine the mutual influence that the child, their family, friends, neighbours, community and wider society have upon one another. It is a holistic model which focuses on the ways in which children’s developmental needs, the capacity of their parents to respond appropriately to those needs and environmental factors interact with one another over time. 18 Addresses the context within which needs, risks and problems arise: Ecological framework “individuals do not live in a vacuum, rather they exist within complex systems made up of their immediate surroundings, social networks, cultural communities, set within a wider social structure.” Baldwin and Walker in Adams et.al.(2005) 19 Further Reading Handout H5 Structural factors affecting children and families/carers Centre for Economic and Social Inclusion/Child Poverty Action Group http://www.childpovertytoolkit.org.uk. Jack, G. and Gill, O. (2003) The Missing Side of the Triangle: Assessing the Importance of Family and Environmental Factors in the Lives of Children. Barkingside: Barnardo’s. Reacroft, J. (2008) Like any other child? Children and families in the asylum process. London: Barnardos. Ridge, T. (2009) An Evidence Review of Children and Families’ Experiences of Poverty. Leeds: Child Poverty Unit. 20